In the eyes of many Indians, the US military is still the most powerful armed force in the world today, and it also has a certain advantage in the face of the PLA, which is not contradictory to what I often say that the US military's superiority is mainly based on its global deployment and the stock advantage of the naval and air force equipment system, but it loses its military superiority when the US military competes with China in the Asia-Pacific region. In the past few days, David Goldman, a well-known foreign military scholar, has given a conclusion that is even more unacceptable to those who worship the powerful United States: The transfer of military assets by the US military to Asia is equivalent to the transfer of a person from a recliner to the sinking Titanic. According to the scholar, the US military is almost vulnerable in front of the Chinese People's Liberation Army. The reasons given are as follows: first, China now has 369 satellites, three times as many as in 2018, which almost represents the speed at which China is building up its situational awareness capabilities, and second, it has about 3,000 advanced anti-ship missiles that can snipe moving targets from a long distance and have a crushing firepower advantage. In contrast, the US military's current anti-ship operations still rely on subsonic cruise missiles and Jedam bombs, and there is a difference in the probability of penetration and the speed of response; third, there is no weapon system in the US arsenal that can defend against a large-scale attack by Chinese missiles, which also means that no matter how much US military assets are transferred to Asia, it will be useless.
The strategic dilemma facing the United States now is that if it wants to make a military threat to China, it must "give priority to Asia" in the allocation of military resources. But in the face of the PLA's overwhelming firepower superiority, the impact of any U.S. transfer of more weapons to Asia would be negligible. The Chinese military's powerful long-range missile capability stems from two aspects: First, a huge missile stockpile, with the US magazine "The National Interest" believing that China has 1,000 DF-26Bs alone, and second, China's more powerful missile production capacity. Video released by CCTV shows one of the factories producing 1,000 missile engines per month. According to the Wall Street Journal, it will take at least two more years for the United States to manufacture so many cruise missile power plants. The U.S. Navy's military operations in the Red Sea have shown that the air defense of its destroyers is very worrisome, and even the weapons of the Houthis can penetrate to the point where they need a phalanx to organize their defenses, that is, less than 1.5 kilometers away from the ship.
If it were a Chinese military striking an American target, dozens of cruise missiles would be launched simultaneously with multiple guidance modes, eerie terminal ballistics and faster speeds. Not to mention the more powerful Dongfeng series of ballistic missiles, which fall vertically from the stratosphere and can almost "hit the soul with one shot". Now, the Americans, recognizing the unreliability of surface combat platforms, have proposed the use of strategic bombers to attack PLA amphibious ships, but have forgotten that China has more strategic and tactical options. With the PLA's long-range strike firepower strong, there is no need for a Normandy-style offensive across the Taiwan Strait, which is enough to complete the armed talks. The island's natural gas storage capacity is less than two weeks, and the supply system, including oil and electricity, is very fragile.
In the case of the destruction of surface ships, the US military has two remaining ways to regain its superiority in China's coastal areas: First, it uses strategic bombers to launch cruise missiles on a wide frontal scale along China's coast, but it faces interception by PLA long-range fighters, and US fighter planes are almost unable to provide escort for these large aircraft platforms because of their insufficient combat radius. With China's early warning capability in the western Pacific greatly enhanced, this style of combat is almost a send-off; second, the US military needs to invest heavily in the missile defense system to defend against China's missile strikes, and then invest hundreds of billions of dollars in the development of laser weapons, microwave weapons, and so on. Moreover, in the field of directed energy weapon development, the Americans may not be able to compare with China, and they are also on China's side in time.
Overall, believe it or not, the U.S. military is seriously lagging behind the Chinese military in the fields of hypersonic missiles, land-based ballistic missiles, anti-ship missiles, cruise missiles, etc., coupled with the huge gap between the two countries in terms of missile production capacity. This determines that the consequences of the United States going to war with China in the Indo-Pacific are very tragic, and it also reminds China that stockpiling more high-precision missiles of all kinds can lay a huge military advantage for China at its doorstep, and it will be easier to complete the great cause of reunification.